Who has a better auditory gaydar? Sexual orientation categorization by heterosexual and lesbian, gay and bisexual people
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2023 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10071/27920 |
Resumo: | Lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) people are supposed to be better at gaydar than heterosexual. Across two studies we examined auditory gaydar performed by LGB and heterosexual listeners. In Study 1 participants (n = 127) listened to male and female speakers (n = 10) and judged their sexual orientation on a binary choice (gay/lesbian vs. heterosexual). In Study 2, participants (n = 192) judged speakers’ (n = 31) sexual orientation on a Kinsey-like scale (1 = exclusively heterosexual, 7 = exclusively gay/lesbian). Results showed gaydar judgments differences in relative terms that did not indicate an overall gaydar accuracy. Moreover, LGB participants were not better at gaydar than heterosexual participants but rather showed a shift in criterion when making auditory gaydar judgments, namely they report a weaker straight categorization bias. Overall, these findings contribute to the understanding of sexual orientation categorization among heterosexual majority and LGB minority groups. |
id |
RCAP_886e4ad585d558effe9efade4c501775 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/27920 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Who has a better auditory gaydar? Sexual orientation categorization by heterosexual and lesbian, gay and bisexual peopleGaydarVoiceSexual orientationGender typicalityLesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) people are supposed to be better at gaydar than heterosexual. Across two studies we examined auditory gaydar performed by LGB and heterosexual listeners. In Study 1 participants (n = 127) listened to male and female speakers (n = 10) and judged their sexual orientation on a binary choice (gay/lesbian vs. heterosexual). In Study 2, participants (n = 192) judged speakers’ (n = 31) sexual orientation on a Kinsey-like scale (1 = exclusively heterosexual, 7 = exclusively gay/lesbian). Results showed gaydar judgments differences in relative terms that did not indicate an overall gaydar accuracy. Moreover, LGB participants were not better at gaydar than heterosexual participants but rather showed a shift in criterion when making auditory gaydar judgments, namely they report a weaker straight categorization bias. Overall, these findings contribute to the understanding of sexual orientation categorization among heterosexual majority and LGB minority groups.Routledge/Taylor and Francis2023-02-15T13:24:41Z2023-01-01T00:00:00Z20232023-04-03T09:52:40Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10071/27920eng0091-836910.1080/00918369.2021.2004796Fasoli, F.Maass, A.Berghella, L.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-11-09T17:45:14Zoai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/27920Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T22:21:35.705383Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Who has a better auditory gaydar? Sexual orientation categorization by heterosexual and lesbian, gay and bisexual people |
title |
Who has a better auditory gaydar? Sexual orientation categorization by heterosexual and lesbian, gay and bisexual people |
spellingShingle |
Who has a better auditory gaydar? Sexual orientation categorization by heterosexual and lesbian, gay and bisexual people Fasoli, F. Gaydar Voice Sexual orientation Gender typicality |
title_short |
Who has a better auditory gaydar? Sexual orientation categorization by heterosexual and lesbian, gay and bisexual people |
title_full |
Who has a better auditory gaydar? Sexual orientation categorization by heterosexual and lesbian, gay and bisexual people |
title_fullStr |
Who has a better auditory gaydar? Sexual orientation categorization by heterosexual and lesbian, gay and bisexual people |
title_full_unstemmed |
Who has a better auditory gaydar? Sexual orientation categorization by heterosexual and lesbian, gay and bisexual people |
title_sort |
Who has a better auditory gaydar? Sexual orientation categorization by heterosexual and lesbian, gay and bisexual people |
author |
Fasoli, F. |
author_facet |
Fasoli, F. Maass, A. Berghella, L. |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Maass, A. Berghella, L. |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Fasoli, F. Maass, A. Berghella, L. |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Gaydar Voice Sexual orientation Gender typicality |
topic |
Gaydar Voice Sexual orientation Gender typicality |
description |
Lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) people are supposed to be better at gaydar than heterosexual. Across two studies we examined auditory gaydar performed by LGB and heterosexual listeners. In Study 1 participants (n = 127) listened to male and female speakers (n = 10) and judged their sexual orientation on a binary choice (gay/lesbian vs. heterosexual). In Study 2, participants (n = 192) judged speakers’ (n = 31) sexual orientation on a Kinsey-like scale (1 = exclusively heterosexual, 7 = exclusively gay/lesbian). Results showed gaydar judgments differences in relative terms that did not indicate an overall gaydar accuracy. Moreover, LGB participants were not better at gaydar than heterosexual participants but rather showed a shift in criterion when making auditory gaydar judgments, namely they report a weaker straight categorization bias. Overall, these findings contribute to the understanding of sexual orientation categorization among heterosexual majority and LGB minority groups. |
publishDate |
2023 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-02-15T13:24:41Z 2023-01-01T00:00:00Z 2023 2023-04-03T09:52:40Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10071/27920 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10071/27920 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
0091-8369 10.1080/00918369.2021.2004796 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Routledge/Taylor and Francis |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Routledge/Taylor and Francis |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799134777292357632 |